After the recent threads about possible candidates for both parties, I do think the Republicans have a stronger stable of options. The Democrats have Hillary and a prayer for a dark-horse. I don't like the candidates on the right, but they've got a number of guys will a modicum of credibility.
Not really accurate - his mom thinks he's an excellent candidate..but she doesn't want him to run because its an extremely taxing job and doesn't want him to go through all the personal/health/family problems that come with being president. ^^This^^ Jeb is far different than W, and right now these #'s are more based on what people think of W than Jeb. My Step-mother has always voted democrat, and even she voted Jeb for Governor. Jeb is actually a decent politician, and unfortunately his name hurts him.
I think all the BUSH's, including Jeb, have illegal immigrants working for them in their homes. This is why they defend it. They don't want Dolores to be taken away. :grin:
I'm going off of this story from a few months back which sort of aligns with the plutocracy sentiment from rocketman's post
Bill Kristol, who tends to be wrong on almost all his predictions, does make some good points here - especially the last paragraph: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/bill-kristol-jeb-bush-2016-elections-105470.html?hp=l1 Bill Kristol is willing to put money — a lot of it — on former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush not becoming the Republican presidential nominee in 2016. “I think there’s no way there will be a Bush-Clinton race in 2016,” the conservative commentator said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Tuesday. “I will buy all of you dinner. … This could be expensive in New York, I guess. I’m willing to go out on a limb.” Kristol said Republican primary voters will not choose someone in 2016 “who was last in office a decade ago,” like the former Republican governor. “He’s a good man; he hasn’t been involved in any of the fights of the [President Barack] Obama years,” Kristol said. “Republicans are kind of worked up about Obamacare, about the federal policy failures, that like someone who is either engaged in those fights in Washington or a governor who’s governed successfully in real time. i.e., now, so a Scott Walker or a Mike Pence, or a Ted Cruz or a Marco Rubio or a Paul Ryan.” The “Weekly Standard” editor said not only would the governors and lawmakers he mentioned be more appealing to primary voters, they’d also be a better candidate than Bush against the Democratic frontrunner, former Secretary State Hillary Clinton. “If it’s Bush against Clinton, it’s two people who have been around an awful long time, two people who sort of inherited the mantle,” Kristol said. “And then Hillary gets to say, ‘I’m the first woman president.’ And Jeb gets to say, ‘I’m the third Bush president.’ That’s not a good match-up for Republicans. Whereas … all those guys get to say ‘generational change, conservative reform agenda, get away from the failures of the Obama years,’ which Secretary Clinton was part of. I think that’s a much better message for Republicans.”
Any republican "has a shot" due to the 2 party system. TBH Jeb becoming the nominee would just puts the final nail in the coffin over whether we live in a "democracy"
Dramatic, Little Known GOP Rule Change Takes Choice Of Presidential Candidate Away From Rank And File Republicans And Hands It To Party Elite http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...file-republicans-and-hands-it-to-party-elite/ Chairman Reince Priebus—along with a number of national committee members on the Mitt Romney bandwagon—made the determination that anyone or anything associated with libertarian Ron Paul was bad news for the GOP’s chances and, as such, were to be avoided at all costs.
I think this article is totally wrong. He's right that in the early states, it's unlikely that there will be too many majorities. But once the field is narrowed down after the first few weeks, candidates will start receiving majorities for the latter states.
I think its ridiculous that Hillary is even in this position as well. I think both Democrats and Republicans are so scared to try anything new, creative or otherwise that they fall back to some false relation to a leader. Whether a Bush, Kennedy or Clinton, we are a meritocracy not an aristocracy. I want people that did things differently to get to their position, not ones that acted on the status quo of themselves or their family.
Since when do you speak towards which party I belong to? I don't belong to either, I am fiscally quite conservative and believe in a limited government role in the economy and regulation. I also believe in a limited government role in our lives and socially feel anybody can do whatever it is they want to do. The irony with Republicans is that they want government to have no part in how they run their businesses but they want government to have a part in how they live their lives. The irony with Democrats is they want government to have no part in how they live their lives, but are willing to give the government extreme control of their business, health and retirement lives.
The biggest determinant of your future success in the US is who your parents are and how much money they have - the US is highly aristocratic compared to other developed countries.
No; like his father, Jeb has too much real life work experience to envision or enthusiastically promise things that don't add up, his dissonance and cynicism will eventually shine through and scare away the money and delegates. Unless we lose another embassy or the next Reagan comes through town he's spent.
This is one of the best posts I've ever read in the D&D. I'm with you, I'm so tired of the BS. I'm not even sure we agree on most issues, but I just respect someone so much more when they think for themselves politically instead of following "the home team". Unfortunately, we don't see this enough from our elected officials. Too many career guys holding on to their seats.
His daughter's troubles with the law will probably stop him from even being a candidate. There has only been one Catholic president, JFK.
